Professional Documents
Culture Documents
gui284CPG1212E PDF
gui284CPG1212E PDF
THE EXECUTIVE COUNCIL OF THE Evidence: Published literature was retrieved through searches of
SOCIETY OF CANADIAN COLPOSCOPISTS PubMed or Medline, CINAHL, and The Cochrane Library in October
2008 using appropriate controlled vocabulary (e.g., colposcopy,
James Bentley, MB ChB, Halifax NS cervical dysplasia) and key words (e.g., colposcopy management,
Monique Bertrand, MD, London ON CIN, AGC, cervical dysplasia, LEEP, LLETZ, HPV testing, cervical
dysplasia triage). Results were restricted to systematic reviews,
Lizabeth Brydon, MD, Regina SK
randomized control trials/controlled clinical trials, and observational
Hlne Gagn, MD, Ottawa ON studies. There were no date or language restrictions. Searches were
Brian Hauck, MD, Calgary AB updated on a regular basis and incorporated in the guideline to July
2012. Grey (unpublished) literature was identified through searching
Marie-Hlne Mayrand, MD, Montreal QC the websites of health technology assessment and health technology
Susan McFaul, MD, Ottawa ON assessment-related agencies, clinical practice guideline collections,
and national and international medical specialty societies.
Patti Power, MD, St. Johns NL
Expert opinion from published peer-reviewed literature and
Alexandra Schepansky, MD, Edmonton AB
evidence from clinical trials is summarized. Consensus opinion is
Marina Straszak-Suri, MD, Ottawa ON outlined when evidence is insufficient.
SPECIAL CONTRIBUTORS Values: The quality of the evidence is rated using the criteria described
Terry Colgan, MD, Toronto ON by the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health
Care (Table 1).
Laurette Geldenhuys, MD, Halifax NS
Validation: This guideline has been reviewed for accuracy from content
Mark Heywood, MD, Vancouver BC
experts in cytology, pathology, and cervical screening programs.
Roberta Howlett, PhD, St. Thomas ON Guideline content was also compared with similar documents from
Linda Kapusta, MD, Mississauga ON other organizations including the American Society for Colposcopy and
Cervical Pathology, the British Society for Colposcopy and Cervical
Rachel Kupets, MD, Toronto ON Pathology, and the European Cancer Network.
Joan Murphy, MD, Toronto ON
Jill Nation, MD, Calgary AB
J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2012;34(12):11881202
Vyta Senikas, MD, Ottawa ON
Michael Shier, MD, Toronto ON
Key Words: Cervical cytology, cervical cancer, colposcopy,
Disclosure statements have been received from all authors. treatment, follow-up, abnormalities, guidelines
This document reflects emerging clinical and scientific advances on the date issued and is subject to change. The information
should not be construed as dictating an exclusive course of treatment or procedure to be followed. Local institutions can dictate
amendments to these opinions. They should be well documented if modified at the local level. None of these contents may be
reproduced in any form without prior written permission of the SOGC.
Table 1. Key to evidence statements and grading of recommendations, using the ranking of the Canadian Task Force
on Preventive Health Care
Quality of evidence assessment* Classification of recommendations
I: Evidence obtained from at least one properly randomized A. There is good evidence to recommend the clinical preventive action
controlled trial
II-1: Evidence from well-designed controlled trials without B. There is fair evidence to recommend the clinical preventive action
randomization
II-2: Evidence from well-designed cohort (prospective or C. The existing evidence is conflicting and does not allow to make a
retrospective) or casecontrol studies, preferably from recommendation for or against use of the clinical preventive action;
more than one centre or research group however, other factors may influence decision-making
II-3: Evidence obtained from comparisons between times or D. There is fair evidence to recommend against the clinical preventive action
places with or without the intervention. Dramatic results in
uncontrolled experiments (such as the results of treatment with E. There is good evidence to recommend against the clinical preventive
penicillin in the 1940s) could also be included in this category action
III: Opinions of respected authorities, based on clinical experience, L. There is insufficient evidence (in quantity or quality) to make
descriptive studies, or reports of expert committees a recommendation; however, other factors may influence
decision-making
*The quality of evidence reported in these guidelines has been adapted from The Evaluation of Evidence criteria described in the Canadian Task Force on
Preventive Health Care.95
Recommendations included in these guidelines have been adapted from the Classification of Recommendations criteria described in the Canadian Task Force
on Preventive Health Care.95
AGC-N atypical glandular cells-favour neoplasia 06. A colposcopically identified lesion should be biopsied. (III-C)
AGC-NOS atypical glandular cells-not otherwise specified 07. If no lesion is identified, biopsies of the transformation zone
AGUS atypical glandular cells of undetermined significance should be considered. (III-C)
AIS Adenocarcinoma in situ
Managing ASC-H
ALTS ASCUS/LSIL Triage Study for Cervical Cancer
08. A woman with an ASC-H Pap smear should have colposcopy to
ASC-H atypical squamous cells-cannot exclude
rule out CIN 2 or 3 and/or cancer. (II-2A)
high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion
ASCUS atypical squamous cells of undetermined 09. Biopsies should be performed on any identifiable lesions at
significance colposcopy. (II-2A)
CIN cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 10. With an ASC- H Pap smear, the finding of negative colposcopy
ECC endocervical curettage does not automatically warrant a diagnostic excisional
procedure. (III-E)
HPV human papillomavirus
HR-HPV high-risk HPV Managing HSIL
HSIL high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion 11. All women with an HSIL test result should have
LEEP/ LLETZ loop electrosurgical excision procedure/large loop colposcopy. (II-2A)
excision of the transformation zone
12. In the absence of an identifiable lesion at colposcopy, whether
LSIL low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion satisfactory or unsatisfactory, an endocervical curettage and
Pap smear Papanicolaou smear directed biopsies should be performed. (III-B)
SCC squamous cell carcinoma 13. In women with HSIL, when the transformation zone is not seen
TZ transformation zone in its entirety and endocervical curettage and/or biopsy results
of American Pathologists and the American Society for must be no suspicion of glandular disease; there is no
Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology recommended the cytological/histological disparity; and the patient has not
following terminology for HPV-associated squamous had previous treatment.
lesions: Low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion
and high-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion, which Cryotherapy is not recommended for treatment of CIN 3.55
may be further classified using the CIN terminology.51
If excision with LEEP is used the size of loop electrode
This guideline uses the CIN terminology. The rate
must be adjusted depending on the lesion: a type 2 TZ
of progression of these dysplastic lesions has been
requires a larger loop electrode than a type 1 TZ to
well reviewed by Ostor52 (Table 2), and over time the
ensure the lesion is fully excised. If the lesion is not seen
therapeutic approach has been adapted to prevent harm
in its entirety, colposcopy is unsatisfactory and ablative
when lesser CIN grades are unlikely to progress to
therapies should not be used.17,56 Care should be taken to
invasive cancer.
avoid removal of excessive cervical stroma, which would
Treatment modalities include excisional and ablative predispose women to preterm delivery, especially if very
approaches (cryotherapy or laser ablation). The favoured large loops are used or multiple passes taken.
method in Canada is excisional, the loop electrosurgical
excision procedure, which is relatively easy to perform as an A type 3 TZ with a lesion that extends into the
outpatient procedure, although there can be complications. endocervical canal or a glandular lesion requires a larger or
A recent meta-analysis estimated that after a LEEP longer excision for adequate evaluation or treatment. This
procedure the risk for preterm delivery in a subsequent document adopted the new the International Federation
pregnancy of less than 32 to 34 weeks gestation, was 1 in of Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy terminology to
143 treatments.42 The same research group suggested that identify this procedure as a type 3 excision to avoid the
a depth threshold of 10 mm is also a variable in reducing current confusion in terminology.17 Currently, cone biopsy,
harm. Consequently, if the colposcopist is able to adjust diagnostic excisional procedure, laser excision and LEEP
the procedure to the lesion, negative sequelae in future may be used but have different meanings to individual
pregnancy may be minimized.54 colposcopists.56
was 18% for incomplete excision and 3% for complete 33. CIN 3 in women less than 25 years old should be
excision.64 If the deep margins are involved, consideration treated. (III-B)
should be given to repeat excision. Most women should
have colposcopy repeated at 6 months.65 Hysterectomy is Managing Adenocarcinoma in Situ
not recommended as initial therapy for CIN 2 or 3 but may In Canada the ratio of adenocarcinoma to squamous
be performed for women with persistent CIN. carcinoma of the cervix is increasing: adenocarcinoma
accounts for 20% to 25% of all cervical cancer.68 This is
Recommendations
largely because widespread availability of screening by Pap
29. CIN 2 or 3 should be treated. Excisional smears over several decades has led to a significant decrease
procedures are preferred for CIN 3. (II-1A) in squamous cell cancers. Nevertheless, implementation of
30. Women who have positive margins should have cytology quality assurance initiatives in recent years has been
follow-up with colposcopy and directed biopsies associated with a decrease in adenocarcinoma of the cervix.
and/or endocervical curettage. Treatment for
recurrent or persistent CIN 2 or 3 should be by In contrast, diagnosis of premalignant adenocarcinoma in
excision. (II-1B) situ occurs at a ratio of 1:50 when compared with severe
squamous dysplasia.69 Consequently a colposcopist will not
Managing CIN 2 or 3 in Women often see AIS, and the treatment remains controversial.
Less Than 25 Years Old Colposcopic features can be difficult to identify, and lesions
As discussed earlier there is little evidence to justify often extend high into the canal.70 Bertrand and colleagues
routine screening in the adolescent patient. If, however, showed that in 78% of cases the highest lesion in the canal
Pap screening is completed, these patients may be referred was less than 20mm from the exocervix and none were
for colposcopy. Management must be modified to prevent higher than 29.9mm.71 After a diagnosis of adenocarcinoma
harm. Recent evidence suggests that regression of CIN 2 in situ, made by punch biopsy or endocervical curettage, a
in this population occurs at a rate similar to CIN 1.10,40,66,67 diagnostic excisional procedure, or type 3 TZ excision should
The evidence suggests that CIN 2 in the adolescent can be performed. Margin status is an important predictor of
be observed with repeat colposcopy and cytology every residual disease, and thus the method chosen for treatment
6 months for up to 24 months. If dysplasia persists, the must preserve the ability to assess the endocervical margin.
patient should be treated, with either ablative methods or A recent meta-analysis of 33 studies showed that the risk of
LEEP. This is conditional on a satisfactory colposcopy. residual disease was 2.6% with negative margins and 19.4%
If colposcopy is unsatisfactory, treatment should consist with positive margins. Invasive carcinoma was also more
of an excisional procedure. A recent study of regression frequently associated with positive margins (5.2%) than with
rates of CIN 2 in women less than 25 years old (most negative margins (0.1%).72 Thus, if margins are positive, a
of whom were 20 to 25 years old) found that the overall second excision is required.
regression rate over a median of 8 months was 62%. This If AIS is diagnosed after a LEEP procedure is completed
suggests that observation may be reasonable in women (because of a CIN finding), the margins need to be carefully
less than 25 years old.18 In some centres, high-grade examined. If the AIS is small and margins are clear, there
histology is designated as HSIL, i.e., CIN terminology is no need to perform an excisional procedure unless
is not used. If the biopsy specimen is reported as HSIL childbearing is complete, when hysterectomy should be
in an adolescent woman we recommend a review of the considered.73 If fertility is not an issue or negative margins
histology using CIN terminology as suggested by the cannot be achieved, a hysterectomy is recommended.72
College of American Pathologists/American Society
of Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology consensus. After treatment for AIS, if the woman wishes to preserve
If specimen is reclassified as CIN 3, treatment by an her fertility, she can be closely observed in the colposcopy
excisional method is preferred. clinic. She should be seen for colposcopy, ECC, and
cytology testing every 6 to 12 months, for at least 5 years.
Recommendations
HR-HPV testing can be used to reassure the patient.
31. The pathologist should be asked to clarify whether Thereafter the patient should have annual cytology testing.
the lesion is CIN 2 or CIN 3. (III-B)
32. CIN 2 in women less than 25 years old should be Recommendations
observed with colposcopy at 6-month intervals 34. If AIS is diagnosed, treatment needs to be
for up to 24 months before treatment is a diagnostic excisional procedure, or type 3
considered. (II-2B) transformation zone excision. (II-2A)
WAIT TIMES FOR COLPOSCOPY 5. Australian National Health and Medical Research Council. Screening to
prevent cervical cancer: guidelines for the management of asymptomatic
Patients with abnormal screening tests should be seen for women with screen detected abnormalities. 2005. Available at:
colposcopy within a reasonable time, given the risk of high- http://www.nhmrc.gov.au/guidelines/publications/wh39.
grade changes and psychological stress associated with Accessed October 2012.
an abnormal cytology result.42 The SOGC Statement on 6. Wright TC Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer M, Wilkinson EJ,
Wait Times in Obstetrics and Gynaecology recommends Solomon D, et al. 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of
women with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia or adenocarcinoma in situ.
colposcopic assessment within 3 weeks for HSIL cytology,
J Low Genit Tract Dis 2007;11(4):22339.
within 6 to 8 weeks for ASC-H or LSIL, and within 6 weeks
7. National Health Service. Colposcopy and programme management:
for an AGC cytology result.93 These recommendations are guidelines for the NHS Cervical Screening Programme, 2nd edition. 2010;
similar to the recommendation of the National Health Available at: http://www.cancerscreening.nhs.uk/cervical/publications/
Service Cervical Screening Programme in the United nhscsp20.html. Accessed February 28, 2011.
Kingdom, which states that 90% of cases with high-grade 8. Arbyn M, Anttila A, Jordan J, Ronco G, Schenck U, Segnan N, et al.
cytology should be seen within 4 weeks, and 90% of all European guidelines for quality assurance in cervical cancer screening.
Second editionsummary document. Ann Oncol 2010;21(3):44858.
tests should be seen within 8 weeks of referral.7
9. Murphy KJ. Screening for cervical cancer. In: Canadian consensus
The importance of guidelines to direct referral times to guidelines in human papillomavirus. SOGC clinical practice guideline no.
196, August 2007. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2007;29(Suppl 3):S27S36.
colposcopy was illustrated in an Ontario population-based
review.94 Referrals were reviewed for Pap smear results of 10. Moscicki AB, Cox JT. Practice improvement in cervical screening
and management (PICSM): symposium on management of cervical
HSIL, AGC, and ASC-H between 2000 and 2006. Women abnormalities in adolescents and young women. J Low Genit Tract Dis
with HSIL results were seen in colposcopy at a median time 2010;14(1):7380.
of 67 days, those with AGC at 108 days, and those with 11. Institut nationale de sant publique Qubec. Recommendations on
ASC-H at 80 days. Invasive disease of the lower genital tract optimizing cervical cancer screening in Qubec. 2009; Available at:
was detected in 2.4 % of those with ASC-H, 3% of those http://www.inspq.qc.ca/pdf/publications/1081_CervicalScreening.pdf.
Accessed March11, 2011.
with AGC, and 3.12% of those with HSIL. Unfortunately
in this population there was a 26% loss to follow-up (i.e., 12. Alberta Health Services. Alberta Cervical Cancer Screening: Clinical
Practice Guidelines and Management of Abnormal Cytology. 2009;
women who did not have colposcopy within 24 months). Available at: http://www.screeningforlife.ca/_files/file.php?fileid=
filenrNvasUkRV&filename=file_CC_CPG_Summary_Chart_LowR_
Recommendations Mar_2010.pdf. Accessed March 11, 2011.
42. Women with ASC-H or AGC should be seen in a 13. Murphy J, Kennedy EB, Dunn S, McLachlin M, Fung Kee Fung M,
colposcopy clinic within 6 weeks of referral. (III-C) Gzik D, et al. Cervical screening: a guideline for clinical practice in
43. Women with HSIL should ideally be seen in a Ontario. J Obstet Gynaecol Can 2012;34(5):45358.
colposcopy clinic within 4 weeks of referral. (III-C) 14. Bornstein J, Bentley J, Bsze P, Girardi F, Haefner H, Menton M, et al.
44. Women with a Pap smear suggestive of carcinoma 2011 Colposcopic Terminology of the International Federation for
Cervical Pathology and Colposcopy. Obstet Gynecol 2012;120(1):16672.
should be seen in a colposcopy clinic within 2
15. Gage JC, Hanson VW, Abbey K, Dippery S, Gardner S, Kubota J, et al.
weeks of referral. (III-C)
Number of cervical biopsies and sensitivity of colposcopy. Obstet
45. All other women with abnormal results should Gynecol 2006;108(2):26472.
be seen in a colposcopy clinic within 12 weeks of 16. Zuchna C, Hager M, Tringler B, Georgoulopoulos A, Ciresa-Koenig A,
referral. (III-C) Volgger B, et al. Diagnostic accuracy of guided cervical biopsies:
a prospective multicenter study comparing the histopathology of
simultaneous biopsy and cone specimen. Am J Obstet Gynecol
REFERENCES 2010;203(4):321.e1321.e6.
1. Canadian Cancer Societys Steering Committee. Canadian cancer 17. Gage JC, Duggan MA, Nation JG, Gao S, Castle PE. Detection of
statistics. 2009. Available at: https://www.cancer.ca/Canada-wide/ cervical cancer and its precursors by endocervical curettage in 13,115
About%20cancer/Cancer%20statistics/Past%20statistics.aspx?sc_lang=en. colposcopically guided biopsy examinations. Am J Obstet Gynecol
Accessed October 11, 2012. 2010;203(5);481.e19.
2. International Agency for Research on Cancer, World Health Organization. 18. ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. A randomized trial on the
IARC handbooks of cancer prevention: cervix cancer screening. Lyon: management of low-grade squamous intraepithelial lesion cytology
IARC Press; 2005. interpretations. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188(6):1393400.
3. Ferris DG, Cox JT, OConnor DM, Wright VC, Foerster J. Modern 19. TOMBOLA Group. Cytological surveillance compared with immediate
colposcopy textbook and atlas. 2nd ed. Dubuque IA: Kendall/Hunt referral for colposcopy in management of women with low grade
Publishing Company; 2004. cervical abnormalities: multicentre randomised controlled trial. BMJ
2009;339:b2546.
4. Working Group of Cervical Screen Singapore. Management guidelines
for abnormal Pap smear & invasive disease of the cervix. 2002. Available 20. Arbyn M, Dillner J, Van Ranst M, Buntinx F, Martin-Hirsch P,
at: http://www.hpb.gov.sg/data/hpb.home/files/pro/cervicalscreen/ Paraskevaidis E. Re: Have we resolved how to triage equivocal cervical
managementguidelines_papsmear.pdf. Accessed October 11, 2012. cytology? J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96(18):14012; author reply 1402.
21. Arbyn M, Buntinx F, Van Ranst M, Paraskevaidis E, Martin-Hirsch P, 38. Ries LAG, Melbert D, Krapcho M, Mariotto A, Miller BA, Feuer EJ, et al.
Dillner J. Virologic versus cytologic triage of women with equivocal Pap eds. SEER Cancer Statistics Review, 19752004, National Cancer Institute.
smears: a meta-analysis of the accuracy to detect high-grade intraepithelial Bethesda, MD; 2007. Available at: http://seer.cancer.gov/csr/1975_2004.
neoplasia. J Natl Cancer Inst 2004; 96(4):28093. Accessed October 11, 2012.
22. Arbyn M, Paraskevaidis E, Martin-Hirsch P, Prendiville W, Dillner J. 39. Mount SL, Papillo JL. A study of 10,296 pediatric and adolescent
Clinical utility of HPV-DNA detection: triage of minor cervical lesions, Papanicolaou smear diagnoses in northern New England. Pediatrics
follow-up of women treated for high-grade CIN: an update of pooled 1999;103(3):53945.
evidence. Gynecol Oncol 2005; 99(3 Suppl 1):S711.
40. Moscicki AB, Ma Y, Wibbelsman C, Darragh TM, Powers A, Farhat S,
23. Arbyn M, Sasieni P, Meijer CJ, Clavel C, Koliopoulos G, Dillner J. et al. Rate of and risks for regression of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 2
Chapter 9: Clinical applications of HPV testing: a summary of meta- in adolescents and young women. Obstet Gynecol 2010;116(6):137380.
analyses. Vaccine 2006;24(Suppl 3):S3/7889.
41. Le T, Hopkins L, Menard C, Hicks-Boucher W, Lefebvre J,
24. Barreth D, Schepansky A, Capstick V, Johnson G, Steed H, Faught W. Fung Kee Fung M. Psychologic morbidities prior to loop electrosurgical
Atypical squamous cells-cannot exclude high-grade squamous excision procedure in the treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
intraepithelial lesion (ASC-H): a result not to be ignored. J Obstet Int J Gynecol Cancer 2006;16(3):108993.
Gynaecol Can 2006;28(12):10958.
42. Arbyn M, Kyrgiou M, Simoens C, Raifu AO, Koliopoulos G,
25. Mokhtar GA, Delatour NL, Assiri AH, Gilliatt MA, Senterman M, Martin-Hirsch P, et al. Perinatal mortality and other severe adverse
Islam S. Atypical squamous cells, cannot exclude high-grade squamous pregnancy outcomes associated with treatment of cervical intraepithelial
intraepithelial lesion: cytohistologic correlation study with diagnostic neoplasia: meta-analysis. BMJ 2008;337:a1284.
pitfalls. Acta Cytol 2008;52(2):16977.
43. Samson SL, Bentley JR, Fahey TJ, McKay DJ, Gill GH. The effect of loop
26. Massad LS, Collins YC, Meyer PM. Biopsy correlates of abnormal
electrosurgical excision procedure on future pregnancy outcome. Obstet
cervical cytology classified using the Bethesda system. Gynecol Oncol
Gynecol 2005;105(2):32532.
2001;82(3):51622.
44. FUTURE II Study Group. Quadrivalent vaccine against human
27. Dunn TS, Burke M, Shwayder J. A see and treat management for high-
papillomavirus to prevent high-grade cervical lesions. N Engl J Med
grade squamous intraepithelial lesion pap smears. J Low Genit Tract Dis
2007;356(19):191527.
2003;7(2):1046.
28. Tam KF, Cheung AN, Liu KL, Ng TY, Pun TC, Chan YM, et al. 45. Kohli M, Ferko N, Martin A, Franco EL, Jenkins D, Gallivan S, et al.
A retrospective review on atypical glandular cells of undetermined Estimating the long-term impact of a prophylactic human papillomavirus
significance (AGUS) using the Bethesda 2001 classification. Gynecol 16/18 vaccine on the burden of cervical cancer in the UK. Br J Cancer
Oncol 2003;91(3):6037. 2007;96(1):14350.
29. Daniel A, Barreth D, Schepansky A, Johnson G, Capstick V, Faught W. 46. Cutts FT, Franceschi S, Goldie S, Castellsague X, de Sanjose S,
Histologic and clinical significance of atypical glandular cells on pap Garnett G, et al. Human papillomavirus and HPV vaccines: a review.
smears. Int J Gynaecol Obstet 2005;91(3):23842. Bull World Health Organ 2007;85(9):71926.
30. Castle PE, Fetterman B, Poitras N, Lorey T, Shaber R, Kinney W. 47. Rogoza RM, Ferko N, Bentley J, Meijer CJ, Berkhof J, Wang KL, et al.
Relationship of atypical glandular cell cytology, age, and human Optimization of primary and secondary cervical cancer prevention
papillomavirus detection to cervical and endometrial cancer risks. Obstet strategies in an era of cervical cancer vaccination: a multi-regional health
Gynecol 2010;115(2 Pt 1):2438. economic analysis. Vaccine 2008;26(Suppl 5):F4658.
31. Zhao C, Florea A, Onisko A, Austin RM. Histologic follow-up results 48. Paavonen J, Naud P, Salmeron J, Wheeler CM, Chow SN, Apter D, et al.
in 662 patients with Pap test findings of atypical glandular cells: results Efficacy of human papillomavirus (HPV)-16/18 AS04-adjuvanted vaccine
from a large academic womens hospital laboratory employing sensitive against cervical infection and precancer caused by oncogenic HPV types
screening methods. Gynecol Oncol 2009; 114(3):3839. (PATRICIA): final analysis of a double-blind, randomised study in young
women. Lancet 2009;374(9686):30114.
32. Schnatz PF, Guile M, OSullivan DM, Sorosky JI. Clinical significance
of atypical glandular cells on cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol 49. ACOG Committee on Gynecological Practice. ACOG committee opinion
2006;107(3):7018. No. 431: routine pelvic examination and cervical cytology screening.
33. Ullal A, Roberts M, Bulmer JN, Mathers ME, Wadehra V. The role of Obstet Gynecol 2009; 113(5):11903.
cervical cytology and colposcopy in detecting cervical glandular neoplasia. 50. ACOG Committee on Practice BulletinsGynecology. Cervical
Cytopathology 2009;20(6):35966. cytology screening. ACOG Practice Bulletin no. 109: Obstet Gynecol
34. Cuzick J, Szarewski A, Cubie H, Hulman G, Kitchener H, Luesley D, et al. 2009;114(6):140920.
Management of women who test positive for high-risk types of human 51. Darragh TM, Colgan TJ, Cox JT, Heller DS, Henry MR, Luff RD, et al.;
papillomavirus: the HART study. Lancet 2003;362(9399):18716. LAST Project Work Groups. The lower anogenital squamous terminology
35. Castle PE, Fetterman B, Thomas Cox J, Shaber R, Poitras N, Lorey T, standardization project for HPV-associated lesions: background and
et al. The age-specific relationships of abnormal cytology and human consensus recommendations from the College of American Pathologists
papillomavirus DNA results to the risk of cervical precancer and cancer. and the American Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology. J Low
Obstet Gynecol 2010;116(1):7684. Genit Tract Dis 2012;16(3):20542.
36. Wetta LA, Matthews KS, Kemper ML, Whitworth JM, Fain ET, 52. Ostor AG. Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: a critical
Huh WK, et al. The management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia review. Int J Gynecol Pathol 1993;12(2):18692.
during pregnancy: is colposcopy necessary? J Low Genit Tract Dis
53. Kyrgiou M, Tsoumpou I, Vrekoussis T, Martin-Hirsch P, Arbyn M,
2009;13(3):1825.
Prendiville W, et al. The up-to-date evidence on colposcopy practice and
37. Kohan S, Beckman EM, Bigelow B, Klein SA, Douglas GW. The role of treatment of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia: the Cochrane colposcopy &
colposcopy in the management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia during cervical cytopathology collaborative group (C5 group) approach. Cancer
pregnancy and postpartum. J Reprod Med 1980;25(5):27984. Treat Rev 2006;32(7):51623.
54. Petry KU. Management options for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. 72. Salani R, Puri I, Bristow RE. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the uterine cervix:
Best Pract Res Clin Obstet Gynaecol 2011;25(5):64151. a metaanalysis of 1278 patients evaluating the predictive value of conization
55. Prendiville W. The treatment of CIN: what are the risks? Cytopathology margin status. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2009;200(2):182.e1182.e5.
2009;20(3):14553. 73. Bryson P, Stulberg R, Shepherd L, McLelland K, Jeffrey J. Is
56. Moscicki AB, Shiboski S, Hills NK, Powell KJ, Jay N, Hanson EN, et al. electrosurgical loop excision with negative margins sufficient treatment
Regression of low-grade squamous intra-epithelial lesions in young women. for cervical ACIS? Gynecol Oncol 2004;93(2):4658.
Lancet 2004;364(9446):167883. 74. Serati M, Uccella S, Laterza RM, Salvatore S, Beretta P, Riva C, et al.
57. Stoler MH, Schiffman M; Atypical Squamous Cells of Undetermined Natural history of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia during pregnancy.
Significance-Low-grade Squamous Intraepithelial Lesion Triage Study Acta Obstet Gynecol Scand 2008;87(12):1296300.
(ALTS) Group. Interobserver reproducibility of cervical cytologic and
75. Fader AN, Alward EK, Niederhauser A, Chirico C, Lesnock JL,
histologic interpretations: realistic estimates from the ASCUS-LSIL Triage
Zwiesler DJ, et al. Cervical dysplasia in pregnancy: a multi-institutional
Study. JAMA 2001;285(11):15005.
evaluation. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2010;203(2):113.e1113.e6.
58. The Society for Colposcopy and Cervical Pathology of Singapore.
Structured colposcopy training programme and registration forms. 76. Soutter WP, Sasieni P, Panoskaltsis T. Long-term risk of invasive cervical
Available at: http://www.sccps.org/training.htm. cancer after treatment of squamous cervical intraepithelial neoplasia.
Accessed October 11, 2012. Int J Cancer 2006;118(8):204855.
59. Jones RW, Best DV, Cox B, Fitzgerald NW, Hill M, Jennings P, et al. 77. Melnikow J, McGahan C, Sawaya GF, Ehlen T, Coldman A. Cervical
Guidelines for the management of women with abnormal cervical smears intraepithelial neoplasia outcomes after treatment: long-term follow-
1998. N Z Med J 2000;113(1109):16871. up from the British Columbia Cohort Study. J Natl Cancer Inst
2009;101(10):7218.
60. Royal College of Obstetricians and Gynaecologists. Standards for service
provision in colposcopy services. Available at: http://www.rcog.org.uk/ 78. Soutter WP, de Barros Lopes A, Fletcher A, Monaghan JM, Duncan ID,
womens-health/clinical-guidance/standards-service-provision-colposcopy- Paraskevaidis E, et al. Invasive cervical cancer after conservative therapy
services. Accessed October 11, 2012. for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. Lancet 1997;349(9057):97880.
61. National Cervical Screening Program (Australia). Screening to prevent 79. Mitchell MF, Tortolero-Luna G, Cook E, Whittaker L, Rhodes-Morris H,
cervical cancer: guidelines for the management of asymptomatic Silva E. A randomized clinical trial of cryotherapy, laser vaporization, and
women with screen detected abnormalities; 2005. Available at: loop electrosurgical excision for treatment of squamous intraepithelial
http://www.health.gov.au/internet/screening/publishing.nsf/ lesions of the cervix. Obstet Gynecol 1998;92(5):73744.
Content/guide. Accessed March16, 2011.
80. Paraskevaidis E, Arbyn M, Sotiriadis A, Diakomanolis E, Martin-Hirsch P,
62. Wright TC Jr, Massad LS, Dunton CJ, Spitzer M, Wilkinson EJ,
Koliopoulos G, et al. The role of HPV DNA testing in the follow-up
Solomon D, et al. 2006 consensus guidelines for the management of
period after treatment for CIN: a systematic review of the literature.
women with abnormal cervical cancer screening tests. Am J Obstet
Cancer Treat Rev 2004;30(2):20511.
Gynecol 2007;197(4):34655.
63. McCredie MR, Sharples KJ, Paul C, Baranyai J, Medley G, Jones RW, et al. 81. Cuzick J, Arbyn M, Sankaranarayanan R, Tsu V, Ronco G, Mayrand MH,
Natural history of cervical neoplasia and risk of invasive cancer in women et al. Overview of human papillomavirus-based and other novel options
with cervical intraepithelial neoplasia 3: a retrospective cohort study. for cervical cancer screening in developed and developing countries.
Lancet Oncol 2008;9(5):42534. Vaccine 2008;26(Suppl 10):K2941.
64. Ghaem-Maghami S, Sagi S, Majeed G, Soutter WP. Incomplete excision 82. Meijer CJ, Berkhof J, Castle PE, Hesselink AT, Franco EL, Ronco G,
of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia and risk of treatment failure: a meta- et al. Guidelines for human papillomavirus DNA test requirements for
analysis. Lancet Oncol 2007;8(11):98593. primary cervical cancer screening in women 30 years and older. Int J
Cancer 2009;124(3):51620.
65. Ghaem-Maghami S, Soutter WP. Re: Effect of margin status on cervical
intraepithelial neoplasia recurrence following LLETZ in women over 50 83. Chan BK, Melnikow J, Slee CA, Arellanes R, Sawaya GF.
years. BJOG 2009;116(3):465. Posttreatment human papillomavirus testing for recurrent cervical
66. ASCUS-LSIL Triage Study (ALTS) Group. Results of a randomized trial on intraepithelial neoplasia: a systematic review. Am J Obstet Gynecol
the management of cytology interpretations of atypical squamous cells of 2009;200(4):422.e1422.e9.
undetermined significance. Am J Obstet Gynecol 2003;188(6):138392. 84. Kitchener HC, Walker PG, Nelson L, Hadwin R, Patnick J, Anthony GB,
67. Moore K, Cofer A, Elliot L, Lanneau G, Walker J, Gold MA. Adolescent et al. HPV testing as an adjunct to cytology in the follow up of women
cervical dysplasia: histologic evaluation, treatment, and outcomes. Am J treated for cervical intraepithelial neoplasia. BJOG 2008;115(8):10017.
Obstet Gynecol 2007;197(2):141.e1141.e6. 85. Abrahamowicz M, Bentley J, Bessette P, Coutle F, Ehlen T, Elit L,
68. Howlett RI, Marrett LD, Innes MK, Rosen BP, McLachlin CM. Decreasing Fung-Kee-Fung M, Lau S, Mayrand MH, Plante M, Sauthier P, Trottier H.
incidence of cervical adenocarcinoma in Ontario: is this related to improved Colposcopy vs. HPV testing to identity persistent pre-cancers post
endocervical Pap test sampling? Int J Cancer 2007;120(2):3627. treatment: the CoHIPP trial. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT01051895.
69. Etherington IJ, Luesley DM. Adenocarcinoma in situ of the cervix- Full collaborator details available at: http://www.icid.com/files/
controversies in diagnosis and treatment. J Low Genit Tract Dis HPV_Canadian_Network/HPV-research-directory_Final_Aug_2010.pdf.
2001;5(2):948. Accessed on November 23, 2012.
70. Cullimore JE, Luesley DM, Rollason TP, Byrne P, Buckley CH, 86. ter Haar-van Eck SA, Rischen-Vos J, Chadha-Ajwani S, Huikeshoven
Anderson M, et al. A prospective study of conization of the cervix in the FJ. The incidence of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia among women
management of cervical intraepithelial glandular neoplasia (CIGN) with renal transplant in relation to cyclosporine. Br J Obstet Gynaecol
a preliminary report. Br J Obstet Gynaecol 1992;99(4):3148. 1995;102(1):5861.
71. Bertrand M, Lickrish GM, Colgan TJ. The anatomic distribution of cervical 87. David M, Olbrich C, Neuhaus R, Lichtenegger W. Occurrence
adenocarcinoma in situ: implications for treatment. Am J Obstet Gynecol of suspicious changes in cervix cytology in women after liver
1987;157(1):215. transplantation. Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd 1995;55(8):4314.
88. Clifford GM, Franceschi S. Cancer risk in HIV-infected persons: 92. Foulot H, Heard I, Potard V, Costagliola D, Chapron C. Surgical
influence of CD4 (+) count. Future Oncol 2009;5(5):66978. management of cervical intraepithelial neoplasia in HIV-infected women.
Eur J Obstet Gynecol Reprod Biol 2008;141(2):1537.
89. Denny L, Boa R, Williamson AL, Allan B, Hardie D, Stan R, et al. Human
papillomavirus infection and cervical disease in human immunodeficiency 93. Farrell S, Roye C, Crane J, Davis D, Heywood M, Lalonde A, et al.;
virus-1-infected women. Obstet Gynecol 2008;111(6):13807. SOGC Committee on Wait Times. Statement on wait times in obstetrics
and gynaecology. SOGC Policy statement no. 204, March 208. J Obstet
90. Boardman LA, Cotter K, Raker C, Cu-Uvin S. Cervical intraepithelial Gynaecol Can 2008;30:24870.
neoplasia grade 2 or worse in human immunodeficiency virus-infected
94. Kupets R, Paszat L. How are women with high grade Pap smear
women with mildly abnormal cervical cytology. Obstet Gynecol
abnormalities managed? A population based study. Gynecol Oncol
2008;112(2 Pt 1):23843.
2011;121(3):499504.
91. Kitchener H, Nelson L, Adams J, Mesher D, Sasieni P, Cubie H, et al. 95. Woolf SH, Battista RN, Angerson GM, Logan AG, Eel W. Canadian
Colposcopy is not necessary to assess the risk to the cervix in HIV- Task Force on Preventive Health Care. New grades for
positive women: an international cohort study of cervical pathology in recommendations from the Canadian Task Force on Preventive Health
HIV-1 positive women. Int J Cancer 2007;121(11):248491. Care. CMAJ 2003;169:2078.